If this is your first visit be sure to check out the FAQ. You have to REGISTER before you can post. To start viewing threads, select the forum that you want to visit from the list below.NOTICE: YOUR ACCESS HAS BEEN LIMITED UNTIL YOU REGISTER!

In order to ensure your registration and verification goes smoothly and quickly you should edit your user profile and add some content that verifies your not a robot. Add an avatar or profile image, add some location information, setup your signature, send the admin a quick private message, etc. You can make these changes by clicking on "Settings" in the top right corner of the site. Once inside your personal settings control panel, you can click on edit profile or any of the other options to begin your customizations.

Doing this will help the forum moderators verify your registration and allow you access to the entire forum.If you refuse to do this or take steps to verify your humanity, there is a very good chance your account will be deleted instead of verified.Users that look suspicious or have suspicious email addresses and users with no profile information will be deleted without warning.

I find Hawking’s work to be of no interest, and this has always been my view as a practical chemist: the view of the great majority of chemists. He is afraid of debate with me so, and afraid of answering my e mails in the accepted scientific manner, so as a Civil List Scientist I do not read his work. Silence is golden. It is simple to follow a paper such as UFT139, and all metrics of the Einstein field equation are incorrect. So I no longer read any work based on the Einstein field equation. Hawking has become a media creation. I do not wish to be cruel, but I find all this to be an embarassment to Baconian science. I understand that he is severely disabled and have nothing against him personally. The same goes for Penrose, who is slightly more open minded but again will not debate.

Hawking’s latest incantations on black holes
Friends and Foes alike,
Foes won’t like these one bit, and in particular Dr. Stefan Gillessen of the Max Planck Institute, whom I have promised a special mention at an appropriate time. That time has now come with Hawking’s latest paper. It’s going to be an interesting year, 2014.

Obituary for Halton Arp
January 14, 2014
Many thanks to my friend and colleague Mr Rajpal of Delhi for sending me this notice of an obituary in “The New York Times” for the great astronomer Halton Arp, who rejected Big Bang and was subsequently ostracized by the mindless dogmatists of his time, whose profound knowledge and wisdom surpasses basic human values such as society. This is why I myself gladly said goodbye to the university system in order to think freely. Of course there are good academics and good universities, they visit AIAS every day, but this ostracization means that the system on average has not progressed beyond darkness at noon – it is still a mediaeval system. Dr. Halton Arp worked with Prof. Sir Fred Hoyle, who also left Cambridge in disgust in order to work in Cardiff. Hoyle and Arp had the sense to reject big bang at outset, and due to its neglect of torsion, the underlying theory of big bang is known to be totally wrong, both experimentally and theoretically. Those who exiled Arp have themselves been exiled into the alley of a thousand historical dustbins. Who will remember those who exiled Halton Arp? I corresponded with him a few times, he always relied on data, not theory and he was an excellent astronomer. Those who use dogma in the teeth of fact and mathematical proof are historical failures, Arp will stand out as a shining example of a true natural philosopher.
EMyrone
Sent: 13/01/2014 17:31:44 GMT Standard Time
Subj: Fw: My Alerts: Astrophysics (1 articles

The attached paper has been sent to the physics Nobel Prize committee which ignored it unscientifically, and was also sent to CERN, which also ignored it. The attached shows that there is a basic error in the Higgs theory. Also, the Higgs boson has not been observed experimentally. The discovery of the B(3) field in 1992 means that the standard assumption of zero photon mass has been refuted. Since then the standard model of physics has been refuted in many ways on the ECE sites. These refutations have been accepted and the majority of scientists reject the Higgs boson, and also reject this decision by the Nobel Prize Committee. A Nobel Prize is being forced upon genuine scientists by intensive lobbying, and so the Nobel Prize process is meaningless. It has been deteriorating in quality for some years. Higgs is an unproductive scientist with an h index of only 11, not enough for tenure, and a very low output of papers. The name of this obscure scientist has been attached to something that does not exist in nature, and that is not science, it is bad and boring politics. Accordingly I will not read this lecture, or anything by this lobbying group and will proceed with developing my own ideas. Funds to CERN should be curtailed almost completely because it has shown itself capable of crude deception.
In a message dated 07/12/2013 21:45:31 GMT Standard Time, writes:http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_priz...s-lecture.html
UFT225-final.pdf

This is badly out-dated rubbish put there by people with a chip on both shoulders. Passage of time has shown that scientists take no notice of it so I think it is time to ask Wikipedia to delete it. I have been monitoring its effect for some time, its effect is to drive curious readers towards the www.aias.us site, which they study with interest. After a well known controversy involving my supporters, Wikipedia removed its defamatory article on myself, which was instigated by Lakhtakia, who has multiple chips on both shoulders. He was “Science Guy” on Wikipedia and mutilated the original entry on myself, put up by an unknown supporter. It is well known that Lakhtakia is a psychopath capable of intense, irrational, personal animosity, and is known to have impersonated Cornell Theory Center Arxiv staff and to have sent hate e mail to me repeatedly. He was traced via our feedback system, reported and warned. He should not be a professor at Penn State University Park and I have protested many times to Penn State. One such protest resulted in the admin ordering a police investigation on Lakhtakia. He has been removed from Wikipedia. I suppose he was too much even for them. Marquis is the leading reference vehicle, and Wikipedia is merely a small company constantly in need of charity to keep it going. One day the general public may decide to turn off the gravy tap so that Wikipedia is no longer able to defame distinguished scientists. Standard physics uses Wikipedia as a propaganda outlet, and by now that is very well known in the world of science. Its ludicrous attempts to censor ECE are self contradictory. It refers to Google Scholar, on which there are about six hundred of my papers, reviews and books from 1992 onward on B(3) theory, O(3) electrodynamics and of course ECE theory, both in English and Spanish. If distinguished colleagues try to post my CV for example, Wikipedia removes it almost immediately, so it is completely biased. Its attitude is offensive to science and to the British Government, because I am a Civil List Pensioner appointed by Head of State, Queen Elizabeth, and the Prime Minister. In contrast I am in twenty eight editions of Marquis Who’s Who in America, World, Science and Engineering. Currently there are fifteen AIAS Fellows in Marquis with several more nominated this year. There are very few institutes with fifteen members of staff in Marquis, yet if someone tried to post an entry on AIAS, Wikipedia would remove it immediately. It is controlled by the very corrupt system of standard physics, well known now to be very corrupt in several ways. So I do not think that Wikipedia should be publicly funded, and I urge all scientists and other members of the general public to withdraw their finance from Wikipedia.